Tippmann Pneumatics Inc. Homepage
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Cop and tazer overkill.

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 2345>
Author
Fuzzey5-0 View Drop Down
Member
Member


Joined: 09 November 2009
Location: So VA
Status: Offline
Points: 11
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Fuzzey5-0 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 November 2009 at 1:20am
Originally posted by Linus Linus wrote:

Originally posted by Skillet42565 Skillet42565 wrote:

Eville and I are both criminal justice majors, we know what we're talking about when it comes to tasing a damn suspect who isn't resisting.



Yet me, who is a CJ major further into studies and with a degree, CJ explorer for 2 years, a working EMT, and a soon-to-be Paramedic, knows nothing according to you? I have actual real-world implementation of what I learned, so does that instantly mean I'm right and you're wrong?



Don't use education to back your view up if you don't know the facts surrounding the case, which you, sir, do not.


I Hate book jockeys myself. Or self-proclaimed bar exam success stories.

Linus has the right train of thought. Innocent until proven guilty.

Isn't it interesting how the cop haters will be quick to say the cop was wrong, the cop lovers will be quick to say the cop was right? It's called bias.

Very rarely are there those that can call a neutral ground.

I'm partial to the blue. Sorry, it's true. I will say this, and since I'm not going to bother looking up the actual story in the online print, i'll quote what someone else already did...

"On April 30, police say Ruiz standing on a planter near the Second Precinct headquarters. He was accused of throwing a landscaping brick at a police officer's personal car.":

Do we know why he was standing on a planter? Do we know why he was throwing the brick at a personal car? Do we know what state of mind Ruiz was in? Drugs maybe? Alcohol? Mental?

I've known many a mental person to change personalities mid sentence. Anyone ever dealt with someone hopped on PCP? If you haven't, i reckon you google it. Superhuman strength comes to mind... The one blip the video showed, showed unnecessary force, yes. IF it was just that instant.

Not to mention- as was also brought to light- the Force Continuum can assist an officer in articulation/justification of a particular level of force. One on one with someone is rarely a fair fight. Note the "suspect" is even a bit bigger in stature than the officer. Does that make it right? no... as I said, articulation/justification...

It's called "totality of the circumstance". Not just the "isolated incident" that the mass media portrays.
Back to Top
stratoaxe View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
And my axe...

Joined: 21 May 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6831
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote stratoaxe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 November 2009 at 1:44am
I question the bias and origins of a new member named "Fuzzey5-0" in a police bruatlity thread LOL
 
I think being for or against the cop in this video is premature. This is half a puzzle, with most of the puzzle pieces coming from the man's lawyer, and a very conveniently timed vid.
 
Let's not forget he was doing something wrong to begin with, or he wouldn't be where he was at.
 
All you guys jumping up against this cop, and the few defending, are all very poorly informed at the moment.
Back to Top
Rofl_Mao View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
request denied

Joined: 27 October 2008
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 3192
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rofl_Mao Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 November 2009 at 1:47am
Originally posted by stratoaxe stratoaxe wrote:

I question the bias and origins of a new member named "Fuzzey5-0" in a police bruatlity thread LOL
 
I think being for or against the cop in this video is premature. This is half a puzzle, with most of the puzzle pieces coming from the man's lawyer, and a very conveniently timed vid.
 
Let's not forget he was doing something wrong to begin with, or he wouldn't be where he was at.
 
All you guys jumping up against this cop, and the few defending, are all very poorly informed at the moment.


This.
Back to Top
Linus View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - language 6.29.10

Joined: 10 November 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7908
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Linus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 November 2009 at 1:48am
I havn't made a decision for or against the cop yet. Simply not enough info.

I can see how people think the cop is wrong, because they are simply looking at a small portion of what happened. That's like someone looking at the Doolittle raid on Tokyo without knowing about Pearl. Of course that would make America look like an evil country attacking unprovoked.



But yes, I tend to be biased for cops. Darn me for putting trust in people who have backed me up with combative drug addicts. Darn me for trusting people who will be at my rig within 1 minute of me calling for police assistance. Darn me for giving the benefit of the doubt to those who risk their lives to protect mine.


Darn me for trusting those who haven't yet done anything to make me question the trust.

Back to Top
Fuzzey5-0 View Drop Down
Member
Member


Joined: 09 November 2009
Location: So VA
Status: Offline
Points: 11
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Fuzzey5-0 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 November 2009 at 1:50am
Originally posted by stratoaxe stratoaxe wrote:

I question the bias and origins of a new member named "Fuzzey5-0" in a police bruatlity thread LOL


Touche'... it just happens to be my Xbox Gamer tag...

and it seemed like a fun topic. Not to mention, I was and still sort of am, surprised at the mostly civil reactions this thread is getting.
Back to Top
Linus View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - language 6.29.10

Joined: 10 November 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7908
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Linus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 November 2009 at 1:53am
Originally posted by Fuzzey5-0 Fuzzey5-0 wrote:

I was and still sort of am, surprised at the mostly civil reactions this thread is getting.


Give it time. Eventually this thread will degrade in to me vs 4 people, name calling, knife throwing, goodness... even when we all share the same opinion.





Edited by Linus - 09 November 2009 at 1:54am

Back to Top
High Voltage View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Fire in the disco

Joined: 12 March 2003
Location: 127.0.0.1
Status: Offline
Points: 14179
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote High Voltage Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 November 2009 at 2:13am
Originally posted by Linus Linus wrote:

Yet, it was the lawyer of the supposed victim here that turned over a blatantly short videotape that shows the seconds just before and just after the incident, and nothing else... as if they were trying to hide something themselves.



Funny.

And the police department could have ended the sensational reaction by releasing the full video, but they didn't... as if they were trying to hide something themselves.



Funny.
Back to Top
Linus View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - language 6.29.10

Joined: 10 November 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7908
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Linus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 November 2009 at 2:15am
I'm quite confident that the PD gave the lawyer the full video, who in turn chose not to release the full video.




Funn(ier)

Back to Top
High Voltage View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Fire in the disco

Joined: 12 March 2003
Location: 127.0.0.1
Status: Offline
Points: 14179
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote High Voltage Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 November 2009 at 2:24am
Again, the PD didn't release the full video to the public. Let me make it clear, I'm not taking sides as I do not know what transpired more than a couple seconds before the man was shocked.
Back to Top
stratoaxe View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
And my axe...

Joined: 21 May 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6831
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote stratoaxe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 November 2009 at 2:49am
Just some things I noticed reading on several sites about this case...
 
Originally posted by wcco.com wcco.com wrote:

Goins says his client's civil rights were violated. He wants the city to settle the claim out of court. If not, he says he and his client are prepared to take their case to federal court.

A Minneapolis police spokesperson says Chief Tim Dolan has not seen the tape. The department is not saying anything about the incident, because it is now a legal matter.

The officer named in the incident has not yet been independently confirmed by WCCO. There were a number of officers on the scene.
 
So the Chief of police had not seen the tape at the time of these articles' writing, and the police department hasn't issued a rebuttle for a reason.
 
Also, a later article from the same site-
 
Originally posted by wcco.com wcco.com wrote:

 
 
Ruiz's attorney said he accepted responsibility for what he did to an officer's car and was ordered to pay restitution. The cop's car that was damaged does not belong to the officer who tasered him.

Ruiz was originally charged with a felony but it was dropped down to a gross misdemeanor.

Ruiz's attorney is preparing to sue the Minneapolis Police Department for $75,000 and wants the officer involved to be reprimanded.

Ruiz is also on several years probation from an incident last year where he pulled a gun on a couple of men in a parking lot in Prior Lake. Read the criminal complaint for more details.
 
This guy has quite a violent history. I also read around the Internet that the officer had seized drugs and money from the man, and that he had told him several times before the clip we see to get down, and the man refused.
 
If that's the case, then the officer has the right to use non lethal force on a suspect resisting arrest. And apparently the officers (read officers there were more than one on the scene) were aware of the man's violent past, taking into account of course that this guy is a big dude, and having just had his drugs seized, a big man on drugs isn't worth the risk to take down by hand.
 
That's one side, the officer could have very easily acted out of line, and I could be wrong, but everything seems to point to this guy being a repeat offender who refused to comply.
 
For those of you that said his hands were on the car-just because he was standing still doesn't mean he was complying. Not moving can be, and often is, a form of resisting arrest.
 
This whole thing smells of playing it up for money. They're wanting to settle out of court to the tune of around 70 grand, and of course we need a second release showing how this man is making restitutions for damaging the cop car that he threw a freakin' brick at, and what a responsible young man he is.
 
I dunno, for me, this thing just reeks of dollar signs. More than ever I'd love to see the aforementioned intro to this event.
 
Back to Top
Mack View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
Has no impulse! control

Joined: 13 January 2004
Location: 2nd Circle
Status: Online
Points: 9818
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mack Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 November 2009 at 2:52am
Edited post-script explanation:  This is a reply to HV; Strato had to go and jump in the middle and muddle everything so I figured I'd tack this note on the beginning.

In regards to the PD not releasing the tape:  Not knowing the department policies and applicable state laws I can only speculate on why this is so, but, this speculation is based on experience with similar issues.

The PD is probably required to release the tape (and any other evidence such as photographs, reports, or written statements) to the individual's lawyer under disclosure laws.  Privacy laws (and the desire to avoid a defamation lawsuit) along with department policy could very well prohibit their release of the tape to the public while the individual's attorney is under know such restraint.

Now, my gut feeling is that the taserly* behavior was probably unnecessary, but this is based on minimal evidence and is not sufficient to convict or not convict anyone in the court of public opinion as of yet.

*Just for Whale.


Edited by Mack - 09 November 2009 at 2:54am
Back to Top
stratoaxe View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
And my axe...

Joined: 21 May 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6831
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote stratoaxe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 November 2009 at 2:53am
And just to add, this isn't the first police brutality claim against that department. So I'm sure in the lawyer's eyes, this is a cut and dry settle out of court case to save face.
 
 
Back to Top
Rofl_Mao View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
request denied

Joined: 27 October 2008
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 3192
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rofl_Mao Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 November 2009 at 3:05am
I see whats going on here now.... hmmm.
Back to Top
High Voltage View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Fire in the disco

Joined: 12 March 2003
Location: 127.0.0.1
Status: Offline
Points: 14179
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote High Voltage Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 November 2009 at 3:36am
Originally posted by Mack Mack wrote:

Edited post-script explanation:  This is a reply to HV; Strato had to go and jump in the middle and muddle everything so I figured I'd tack this note on the beginning.

In regards to the PD not releasing the tape:  Not knowing the department policies and applicable state laws I can only speculate on why this is so, but, this speculation is based on experience with similar issues.

The PD is probably required to release the tape (and any other evidence such as photographs, reports, or written statements) to the individual's lawyer under disclosure laws.  Privacy laws (and the desire to avoid a defamation lawsuit) along with department policy could very well prohibit their release of the tape to the public while the individual's attorney is under know such restraint.

Now, my gut feeling is that the taserly* behavior was probably unnecessary, but this is based on minimal evidence and is not sufficient to convict or not convict anyone in the court of public opinion as of yet.

*Just for Whale.

Word. I understood the PD's situation regarding the release of the tape, it's just too fun to prod Linus when he's acting pompous.

I lol'd hard at taserly.
Back to Top
Frozen Balls View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1, filter dodge, 1.28.10

Joined: 14 June 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 5865
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Frozen Balls Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 November 2009 at 3:42am
It doesn't matter what the cops retarded little code says they can or can't do. This is America, a police officer isn't allowed to just electrocute someone for standing there. Oh wow, he threw a brick at somebodies car. I didn't realize that justified electrocuting him.

Oh hey, that guy just painted some graffiti on my police car. Let's shoot him!

Let's recall that this cop casually walked up behind the guy and jabbed a tazer in his neck. Don't you think an aggressive individual "hopped on PCP" (I laughed at that brilliant analysis of someone calmly standing with their hands on a car) would resist? Don't you think someone "hopped on PCP" would be able to ignore a tazer?

No wonder our public services are so loathed. Geniuses like you guys are a part of them.

Back to Top
stratoaxe View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
And my axe...

Joined: 21 May 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6831
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote stratoaxe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 November 2009 at 4:07am
Originally posted by Frozen Balls Frozen Balls wrote:

It doesn't matter what the cops retarded little code says they can or can't do. This is America, a police officer isn't allowed to just electrocute someone for standing there. Oh wow, he threw a brick at somebodies car. I didn't realize that justified electrocuting him.
 
While each of these things on their own merit may be true, together it paints a different story.
 
I'm going to put together an entire sentence out of each of your comments-
 
"Oh wow, a guy who who was on drugs just threw a brick at a police car and is now resisting arrest by just standing there. I didn't realize that justified electrocuting him."
 
Actually, yeah it does.
 
Going through the details, and again you're avoiding the fact that this guy has a violent history in the same area, he's busted throwing bricks at a cop car. That doesn't exactly signify someone in their right mind. You've repeatedly yelled at someone to get down, and that person defiantly stands in one spot.
 
So you have a choice of taking him down by force, which might be a bad idea with a potentially stoned man far larger than yourself, or jolting him to the ground. I know which route I'd take as a cop.
 
That being said, I'm not standing up for the cop, because I don't know the whole story, but neither do you. And in general our public services are loathed by people who dislike cops on the basis of authority. Police brutality is the minority in this country, the majority of the time officers put their lives on the line to either enforce a law or save a life.
 
I dislike cop-haters in the extreme. It's unfortunate that we're willing to give innocent until proven guilty to eveyone except law enforcement in this country. None of you know the full story here, and I'll say it again, you can't defend or prosecute the cop until you do.
 
We only know a few facts of guilt in this case, and they all revolve around the person being electrocuted.
 
Is it possible that police brutality is involved here? Sure it is. But none of the "geniuses" on either side of this debate are informed or qualified to make the verdict that this cop acted out of line.
 
And you know what? Just as an added note-Don't be a freakin' dumbass and throw things at cop cars when you're carrying drugs and evidence on your person, and cases like this are avoided altogether.
Back to Top
Frozen Balls View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1, filter dodge, 1.28.10

Joined: 14 June 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 5865
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Frozen Balls Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 November 2009 at 4:25am
Well, at least you followed the part where the brick throwing happened months earlier...

Originally posted by Eville Eville wrote:

"On April 30, police say Ruiz standing on a planter near the Second Precinct headquarters. He was accused of throwing a landscaping brick at a police officer's personal car."

Obviously still don't have the full story, but it looks to me like the cop was trying to get a little personal revenge on the suspect.  The suspect claims he wasn't resisting at all before that, as credible as that may be.


Back to Top
stratoaxe View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
And my axe...

Joined: 21 May 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6831
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote stratoaxe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 November 2009 at 5:16am
Originally posted by Frozen Balls Frozen Balls wrote:

Well, at least you followed the part where the brick throwing happened months earlier...

Originally posted by Eville Eville wrote:

"On April 30, police say Ruiz standing on a planter near the Second Precinct headquarters. He was accused of throwing a landscaping brick at a police officer's personal car."

Obviously still don't have the full story, but it looks to me like the cop was trying to get a little personal revenge on the suspect.  The suspect claims he wasn't resisting at all before that, as credible as that may be.

The taser-ing also occured on April 30. It's just now making headlines because of the lawsuit.
Back to Top
Reb Cpl View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
2010 Worst Luck award winner

Joined: 10 June 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 14004
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Reb Cpl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 November 2009 at 6:57am
Didn't watch the video, didn't read the 4 pages of saying the same thing over and over.

I've decided that there's no such thing as 'tazer overkill' if you don't put yourself into a position where you COULD be tazed, this wouldn't happen.
I'm starting to believe that zapping perps should become a standard part of the arresting procedure, immediately following the miranda rights reading. That accomplishes three things:

1. It may eliminate the possibility of more serious police 'brutality' if they get to administer just a little bit of juice to the guy that just punched a little old lady and led them on a foot chase down a city street.
2. It lets the  suspect know that these guys mean business, don't screw with them.
3. It'll end this whole whirling crap fest where every time a video clip comes out showing some idiot getting tazed- the bandwagon of "Bad cop! Bad cop!" gets full before you have any idea what the whole story is. You've got a 12 second youtube clip of a guy getting tickled and try to draw an entire conclusion based on that? If tazing becomes so commonplace, then this argument goes away and we don't have to listen to the whining anymore.

Zap 'em all, and zap 'em good.


Back to Top
Mack View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
Has no impulse! control

Joined: 13 January 2004
Location: 2nd Circle
Status: Online
Points: 9818
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mack Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 November 2009 at 2:57pm
Originally posted by Reb Cpl Reb Cpl wrote:


Zap 'em all, and zap 'em good.


Or just give them a good double-zap.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 2345>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 10.03

This page was generated in 0.203 seconds.